13 October 2026
(IMAGE: AI)
In February 2026, the Odessa Development Strategy was approved—a document intended to outline the city’s operational plan and future direction for the next two years. In this article, we’ll try to understand how to properly interpret the Strategy and why it is actually important.
So, Odessa finally has its own Development Strategy, though it’s highly likely that most Odessans know nothing about it. So what exactly is changing for Odessa and its residents following the adoption of the Strategy?
First and foremost, it’s important to emphasize that having a strategy doesn’t guarantee an immediate improvement in quality of life. A city’s development strategy is a strategic planning document designed for a specific period that focuses the community’s efforts on priority areas. This is precisely the first advantage of having the Strategy—the ability to concentrate efforts and financial resources on what is most important today. Odessa’s development strategy includes 5 strategic goals, 24 operational goals, and over 200 tasks. Clearly, the strategic goals represent the city’s priority areas of development; these are worth listing and briefly discussing.
It can be argued that the priority areas of development outlined in the Strategy appear quite logical and take into account Odessa’s current needs. At the same time, the strategic goals themselves are broad, so actual priorities will be determined primarily at the level of specific tasks, projects, and their funding.
It is also important to understand that the city’s development strategy is part of the strategic planning system for state regional policy. In practice, this means two important things. First, its implementation must not occur in isolation but through a specific action plan. Second, having the Strategy creates additional opportunities for the city to apply for state funding for projects that align with the priorities outlined in it.
Finally, it should be noted that strategic planning is also important for cooperation with the EU and other international partners. We are currently not only heavily dependent on international funding but must also demonstrate our ability to plan the city’s development in accordance with clear long-term priorities. The inclusion of a project within the city’s Strategy can also serve as an additional argument when seeking funding, as it demonstrates that this is not an isolated initiative but rather part of the city’s overall development plan.
Thus, the City Development Strategy should be viewed in two dimensions. First, strategic planning is now an integral part of the community’s development system. Upon the expiration of the two-year Strategy, a new seven-year Strategy is to be adopted. Second, despite some unresolved issues, the Strategy creates real opportunities for implementing and financing projects for those willing to take action and show initiative.
As noted above, the current Odessa Development Strategy was adopted for a period of just under two years. For a community development strategy—that is, a long-term plan—such a timeframe is considered too short. In our case, however, we must take into account the extraordinary circumstances related to Russian aggression. The next strategic planning cycle is projected to span seven years. This timeframe, in particular, allows the plan to extend beyond a single term of office for city council members, thereby reducing the city’s long-term priorities’ dependence on a single political cycle.
Given the Strategy’s limited duration, it makes sense to discuss whether we should treat it as a genuine city development plan or as a transitional phase leading to the new 2028–34 plan. I believe the correct approach would be to combine both perspectives. Overall, the Strategy is a perfectly viable document that can be implemented. Since the document has been approved and adopted, the city’s administrative bodies and departments can work on specific tasks. On the other hand, a number of questions remain regarding the process of implementing the Strategy. First, a plan of action is necessary for the full implementation of the Strategy. Second, the issue of funding for a significant portion of the planned tasks remains unresolved at this time.
Of course, it would be wonderful if the 2026–27 Strategy were implemented as fully as possible. At the same time, we must also consider the possibility that it will be implemented only partially. It seems that, in any case, one of the most important outcomes of the 2026–27 Strategy could be the launch of the strategic planning mechanism itself: it will allow us to identify and bring together the city’s active forces capable of working toward its development, as well as to identify weaknesses in planning, financing, and implementation. In this case, even the partial implementation of the current Strategy could provide Odesa with the experience necessary to prepare the next, long-term document.
I think it’s difficult to convince Ukrainians that various programs and plans can actually serve the interests of citizens. In the public imagination, such documents are created by bureaucrats only to be shelved immediately among a stack of similar papers. We do not know the future, but this time there are good prospects for changing the situation for the better.
First, the Strategy was developed with the active participation of representatives from civil society organizations. Second, a number of proposals from civil society representatives were included in the final version of the Strategy. In other words, the public is already part of the process related to the Strategy and has the opportunity to influence not only its discussion but also the subsequent monitoring of its implementation.
It is quite clear that only a small portion of civil society representatives will be directly involved in the Strategy’s implementation and monitoring. This raises the question of whether ordinary citizens will be able to follow this process.
It should be noted that the Strategy contains 128 performance indicators, which can formally be used to assess the success of individual tasks. At the same time, the indicators alone do not constitute a monitoring system: this requires regularly collecting data, comparing it with planned values, and making the results understandable and accessible to citizens.
Currently, representatives of civil society organizations are discussing the creation of a mechanism that would allow Odessa residents to monitor the Strategy’s implementation in real time. In other words, the public monitoring system is still in its formative stages.
And the practical value of the Strategy will depend to a large extent on just how open and regular such monitoring becomes. After all, it is important not only to set goals and indicators but also to give residents the opportunity to see which indicators are being met, which are not, and where problems arise.
A separate issue is who will be held accountable for implementing the Strategy if the planned goals and objectives are not met.
The Strategy itself does not provide for personal penalties for failure to comply and does not designate a single official who would be responsible for implementing the entire document. However, this does not mean that the implementation of the Strategy should remain entirely without accountability. Specific implementers must be identified at the next level—in the action plan for implementing the Strategy. It is there that individual tasks must be transformed into specific actions with deadlines, performance indicators, and designated implementers.
The development strategy alone will not transform Odesa nor guarantee the fulfillment of the tasks outlined in it. Its value lies elsewhere: the city gains a shared direction for development, which can serve as a foundation for decision-making, project preparation, and securing funding.
The 2026–2027 Strategy has obvious limitations and will, in many ways, serve as a test of whether such an approach can work in Odesa at all. Therefore, at the end of its implementation period, it will be important to evaluate more than just the number of tasks completed. An equally telling result will be whether strategic planning becomes a real tool for the city’s development and whether it serves as the foundation for the next, long-term Strategy.
This article was prepared by Intent as part of a partnership within the “Circle of Influence” project. The editorial team independently determines the content, focus, and conclusions of this publication.
The initiative is implemented by the NGO “Community Development Fund ‘DOBRO’” in collaboration with the NGO “STEP” as part of the “Circle of Influence” project, with support from NED. Project partners: the NGO “Zmistom,” the Public Association “Odesa Strategy,” the Odesa City Council’s Department of Economic Development, the Odesa City Council’s Department of Labor and Social Policy, the social communications agency “Shchyro,” and the media outlet “Intent.”
Олег Пархітько
Oct. 12, 2026
Orysia Demska: "The greatest threat is indifference"